47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)
38 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Robert. I can see how it is possible that the John Doe warrant caused the money to show up at Tina Bar. But, that assumes that Cooper would have been free and clear after the statute of limitations was done. I don’t think he would have been free. The IRS could still get him, state police, other federal agencies, etc. Granted keeping the FBI investigation open definitely kept the heat on. 

Cooper would have had to come back and plant the money. That’s a big risk. Or throw it in the river, then hope someone found it. There are so many assumptions here. No one really knows. 
 

I’ve made the comment before that 10,000 bills left that plane, yet we get all wrapped up in the 300 that showed up on Tina Bar. We should be focused just as much on the other 9700. I really liked the concept that EU started with trying to find a $20. I think that still has some potential. 97 percent of the bills are still out there somewhere. Maybe ashes, but still. 
 

I agree, though we are theorizing TBAR, I can't imagine Cooper doing this. Money thrown into a river would be discarded to be never found..

 

Hahneman visited his estranged family in Pennsylvania for Xmas '71 then immediately booked it to Honduras to establish residency...  He hadn't been a Honduran resident since he was a child but did weeks after Norjak.. 

 

I have been looking for Cooper bills in Central America, if they were circulated there nobody would have checked them.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Robert. I can see how it is possible that the John Doe warrant caused the money to show up at Tina Bar. But, that assumes that Cooper would have been free and clear after the statute of limitations was done. I don’t think he would have been free. The IRS could still get him, state police, other federal agencies, etc. Granted keeping the FBI investigation open definitely kept the heat on. 

Cooper would have had to come back and plant the money. That’s a big risk. Or throw it in the river, then hope someone found it. There are so many assumptions here. No one really knows. 
 

I’ve made the comment before that 10,000 bills left that plane, yet we get all wrapped up in the 300 that showed up on Tina Bar. We should be focused just as much on the other 9700. I really liked the concept that EU started with trying to find a $20. I think that still has some potential. 97 percent of the bills are still out there somewhere. Maybe ashes, but still. 
 

Maybe Cooper realized the money was basically too dangerous to spend once he found out through news outlets? Or came to his senses the bills serial numbers were probably recorded and merchants/banks were on the lookout.

If Cooper was smart what did he plan to do with the money knowing the bills would be hot potatoes if he tried to spend, deposit or launder the money.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

(EU) Eric Ulis is a liar and a fraud... a slimy used car salesman.

He actually stole my tie research which I had posted publicly for everyone and claimed it was his work. He then twisted it to fit his Sheridan Peterson narrative.. I left out one piece of info that dates the tie to 1964, not 63.

When I challenged him, he called me a liar and troll for about a year now. He got caught and had to discredit me..

He claimed Sheridan had a numbered account in Singapore,, I discovered that Singapore Banks never enacted the legislation. Ulis just changed it to a Swiss account... that is backfilling a narrative.

 

Not only is he dishonest but his alternate flight path - Sheridan Peterson narrative is garbage. There is no evidence for any of it beyond the fact that Sheridan was a top level jumper.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cooper bill site is still up.. you can check bill#'s here..

http://www.check-six.com/lib/DBCooperLoot.htm

 

I have all the 9998 Cooper bills in a spreadsheet with approx 70 of the TBAR bills #'s identified from various sources. 

 

The published FBI Cooper bill list was sorted alphanumerically... it would be nice to find the list in original order.. then we could ID the 3 TBAR packets and numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This nails it..

1. Witness identification weak. (1976)

2. Case extremely difficult without Cooper cooperating. (1976)

3. Witnesses now relying on sketch rather than individual memory. (1976)

 

P 19818
"Eyewitness identification was considered weak at that time. Nearly 10 years have passed since that conference. The conference came to the conclusion that "if COOPER was to surrender to authorities now or in the near future, it would be extremely difficult to make the case if he was uncooperative."
 

P 19824

“A discussion ensued as to the present strength of the eyewitness identification to which Case Agent _______  responded that it was weak."

P 19825
“A review was made of investigation conducted to date and the possibility of redoing any of same. Reinterview of witnesses at this time was considered to be unproductive as this has been continuous upon various displays and it was felt that at this time they were now relying on artist's conceptions rather than individual memory."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

What exactly does it 'nail'? Witness ID's have always been a crap shoot, and five years after the fact, this should be expected. 

Look...in my humble opinion, even if one of the primary witnesses suddenly came forward and said they were 'positive' that a certain suspect was Cooper...it wouldn't help much. A small exception could be made for the stewardesses, because they were the only ones who knew a hijacking was in progress. To everyone else, Cooper was just another passenger, and most of the passengers were probably thinking of Thanksgiving dinner and visits from their in-laws. 

Identifying someone from a picture thrust into your face by the FBI is one thing. Looking at someone in a lineup and hearing them speak is quite another, and little enough (if any) of that was ever done by the FBI in the Cooper case. Maybe never. Maybe only Richard McCoy. 

Tina Mucklow was shown pictures and a video of Robert Rackstraw, both done not TOO long after the hijacking. She also got to hear his voice. She was absolutely certain Rackstraw wasn't the guy, even 47 years after the fact. 

It nails the fact that the FBI considered evidence too weak to bring a case without Cooper cooperating...  

In other words, without Cooper cooperating there is no prosecution or legal resolution. Most people do not understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georger, still doubling down on stupid...

 

If the Cooper bundles were "randomized" by the bank employee..

Then it was either the packets (some think bundle) or the group of packets (bundle) that were randomized.. you can call them whatever you want for analysis.. The Bank that supplied the money called them "packets". 

But lets call them X to make this really simple..

Either the group of 100 bills = one X was random or the grouping of a number of X was random.

Since the TBAR groups of 100 bills X was not random but in 100's then the group of several X's must have been random..

The packets were not randomized (count), they were micro'd in 100's, given to Cooper in 100's and found on TBAR in 100's. The grouping of packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.

Georger/Carr were wrong and Georger's ego still can't admit it.

 

Georger claimed the Bank never used the term "packet".. I posted 3 FBI references of it and he still denies it...  Winning an argument is more important than the facts.

Not only do you have the facts wrong but your argument is completely irrational. 

Take the L, Goerger, you lost. You always lose. You are an ignorant and arrogant lazy thinker who resorts to lies to win an argument. No wonder you have developed no suspect after over a decade (other than Ted Kaczynski based on a grudge) and spend most of your time trashing, smearing and lying about virtually everyone (EVERYONE) associated with this case in a desperate attempt to be relevant...  discredit and drag everyone else down to make your own lack of accomplishment look better.

Everybody knows it, most don't say anything to avoid being attacked.

Georger is the biggest problem with Shutter's forum, a toxic fraud incapable of any semblance of honest debate. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a nauseating buffoon you are Georger..

I know people used different terms.. that is the whole POINT.. that is why the error was made in the first place. I never claimed Tina used "packet" or any official bank term, you are making up crap strawman args to obfuscate the issue.

The 302's are written by agents,,  one wrote.. referring to the Bank representative.

"He stated the bills were made up of packets of $2000 each...."

Take the L, Georger. YOU LOST.

You can call the 3 TBAR packets cumquats if you like, you are still wrong. The 3 TBAR cumquats were NOT random counts. The money went to Cooper in packets of 100's, each packet grouped and rubber banded into bundles. TBAR was found in 3 packets of 100's in the same order,,,   deny it all you want.

 

I was going to write out a more detailed explanation but why bother... waste of time. Georger has too much screwed up to correct and who cares..

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

NO Georger, you are injecting your nonsense AGAIN..

I was never forced to admit there were rubber band fragments on the bills, I always claimed there were. You assumed I rejected rubber bands altogether because you fail to understand your own logical error... I had claimed there was no evidence the rubber bands were around each individual packet not that there were no rubber bands frags found.

What I was exploring was whether the rubber bands were around each individual packet of 100 bills or potentially all packets holding them together as a single bundle.

There is no evidence that indicated where the rubber band fragments were..   clearly they were not "intact" and I have read an unconfirmed report that 1 packet didn't have any rubber bands. 

The takeaway is, the money went to Cooper in packets/straps of 100 bills per and those were grouped and rubber banded into bundles.  TBAR money was found in three packet/straps of 100 bills in the same order AND they were likely deposited as a single rubber banded bundle. The dominant assumption that the TBAR could have only arrived as three separate packets/straps is false. To arrive separately they must have separated at some time prior, it is more likely they separated on TBAR rather than get separated before and end up all together.

If the TBAR money landed as one bundle then the means by which it arrived changes...

The money was strapped into 100's then they were grouped and rubber banded into random count bundles. The money most likely arrived on TBAR as one single bundle from the river.. as the rubber bands deteriorated the 3 packets fell apart slightly.

Tina, Himmelsbach and the Bank rep all suggest bank bands were used for the packets.. clearly, rubber bands were used for the bundles.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I give up, Georger is still in outer space on this..

 

For everyone else..

The money went to Cooper in 100 bills each, packets or as Himmelsbach called them "straps" which refer to bank straps of 100 bills each. The bills were all random SN order and recorded in physical sequence. Each individual packet/strap was then rubber banded into random count bundles "to make look hastily prepared"..

The TBAR money was found as it was given to Cooper, 3 packets of 100 bills each in the same order. (One was missing a few.)

Since the money went to Cooper in bundles of packets/straps to land on TBAR separated they must have been separated between Cooper receiving them and the find. Tosaw theorized that the 3 packets were the ones Cooper handed to Tina. However, since we don't have the location of the rubber band frags on the TBAR money it is more likely the 3 packet/straps landed on TBAR in one single rubber banded bundle. 

The problem is the terminology isn't consistent and accurate, people have confused and conflated formal and informal terms, packets, straps, packages and bundles. Once you get beyond the labels and sort out the money process it becomes clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

The money went to Cooper in 100 bills each, packets or as Himmelsbach called them "straps" which refer to bank straps of 100 bills each. The bills were all random SN order and recorded in physical sequence. Each individual packet/strap was then rubber banded into random count bundles "to make look hastily prepared"

Going from bank straps as when the money is stored in a bank vault to rubber bands and mixing SN makes logical sense.

I still wonder why any criminal would want that many bills probably knowing the SN is recorded from the bank it came from?

10,000 twenty dollar clues.  Either Cooper died or he was smart enough not to spend or launder the money.

I wonder if they did the same thing with McCoy.  Seems like I saw a picture a few years ago that showed all the confiscated money in packets secured with bank straps laying on a desk.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Coopy said:

Going from bank straps as when the money is stored in a bank vault to rubber bands and mixing SN makes logical sense.

I still wonder why any criminal would want that many bills probably knowing the SN is recorded from the bank it came from?

10,000 twenty dollar clues.  Either Cooper died or he was smart enough not to spend or launder the money.

I wonder if they did the same thing with McCoy.  Seems like I saw a picture a few years ago that showed all the confiscated money in packets secured with bank straps laying on a desk.

 

I have tried to find the source of the McCoy ransom money,, was it a similar bank stash??

Strapped..

DBCooper_article.jpg.64b67bb51e8578f6b018a19eb9fd4a24.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

FBI.. witness memories became corrupted by the sketch. 1976

“A review was made of investigation conducted to date and the possibility of redoing any of same. Reinterview of witnesses at this time was considered to be unproductive as this has been continuous upon various displays and it was felt that at this time they were now relying on artist's conceptions rather than individual memory."

 

 

 

 

witnessrelysketch.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
22 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Flyjack. There is some info going around about the sketches. Any input on that? 

Bruce Smith has pulled together a summary of the sketches..

https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/06/29/db-cooper-a-retrospective-on-the-development-of-the-sketches/

 

Sketch "B" is the best likeness of Cooper based on the process and FBI statements.

 

Sketch "A" was done very quickly, within days with either 2 or 3 stews together,, this is rare and can be problematic. The witnesses can influence each other.

Dated Nov 30..

sketchnov30.jpeg.8c33e85e13f9078ae1f6c8a97c6bab48.jpeg

Having the stews interviewed together is more complicated and can create a biased sketch. Flo did not like the first sketch. 

 

https://www.theiai.org/docs/ForensicArtGuidelinesSGFAFI1stEd.pdf

p 15

3. The group sketch approach:

a) In rare instances, successful sketches have been completed as a result of a group interview. This collaborative approach is accomplished simply by having multiple witnesses present for a single interview, all providing input for a single image. Because of the inherent complications that this technique can add to the process, it should be undertaken by an experienced composite artist rather than a beginner. Care should be taken to minimize the influence that a dominant personality witness may have over a less assertive one, a condition which could suppress valuable information. Logic would dictate that the most practical use of a multiple-witness interview would be for one event that all of the witnesses observed, as opposed to a series of incidents involving the same perpetrator. 

 

The FBI determined in 1976 that witnesses had begun to rely on the sketch rather than memory.. 

witnessrelysketch.jpeg.bb86412466317e9f88136bcd8aa03649.jpeg

 

Sketch B was created to add age, the olive/latin complexion and tweak some characteristics. Most believed sketch "A" was too young looking. Sketch B was done in a more comprehensive way over a longer period of time..

The FBI states that sketch "B" was the best likeness of Cooper. Anybody claiming sketch "A" is better will have a tough time going against this FBI document.

sketchbest.jpeg.173ab24fcefb9dc036ee6ea50c8d219e.jpeg

 

Takeaway,, Sketch "B" is the best likeness and with time witness memories became less reliable. With that, any sketch is a general likeness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

What info? There has been nothing around here lately on that. Here is some reality concerning the sketches. As a result of them, hundreds of people ended up on the suspect list, at least with the FBI as they were investigating the hijacking. None of these alleged suspects added up to a pile of beans, and the FBI wasted a lot of time and manpower going from one to another...one to another...etc. Friends turned in friends. Workers their co-workers. Sometimes people turned in their own family members. 

I've come to the idea that the FBI dedicated so many resources to the Cooper case, and checked out SO many people...that anyone high-profile can probably be eliminated. By 'high-profile,' I mean anyone who was found to have a solid background that could be checked more easily, or had been involved in a previous hijacking, had done time, or who had a police record with the NCIC or the FBI. 

If Cooper fell into one of those categories, the FBI would have figured out who he was a long time ago. 

No, 

The FBI admitted the evidence was so weak that they did not have a case without Cooper cooperating.

The FBI's role is to bring a case to the prosecutor, not throw out a public solution. The prosecutor decides whether to go forward or not, if they decide not to it is never made public.

Even if the FBI investigated a suspect that was actually Cooper they may not have had a case (without cooperation) or the prosecutor may have rejected it. We would never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

I wouldn't take Bruce Smith's word on anything if he claimed day was light and night was dark LOL. The guy is a known liar and supports mass hatred and exclusion of others on his own website. Get real. 

Can you show anything in Bruce's article that is incorrect?

(the stuff I posted is my own, not from Bruce's article)

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

I don't have to.  

You don't have to do anything but you discredit yourself when you say "get real".

Bruce accurately summarized the sketches. 

My comment on the sketches has nothing to do with Bruce's article. It is all mine.

You have used your beef with Bruce to discredit my post, you didn't realize that Bruce's article has nothing to do with my post because you didn't even read his piece before discrediting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vortex podcast..  Drew Beeson on Ted Braden

https://thecoopervortex.podbean.com

 

One thing he has wrong and many others have got wrong is the "negotiable American currency" line..

The word "negotiable" isn't the point.. It is "American" and yes the crew said it. The argument is the crew just added it. Possible, but strange as they are American. Tina said Cooper told her later "circulated US currency"...  

So, we have "US" and "American" added to describe the money in two different instances. That is strong.

What does it mean. If Cooper qualified the money as US/American and it looks like he did, then that would be very rare for somebody in the US who has no experience with another currency to say. 

It suggests Cooper had exposure to a foreign currency, it doesn't mean he was Canadian or a foreign national. He could have been military or a traveller..  but Cooper had some exposure outside the US probably recently. He had an international influence of some sort.

And that would actually include Braden. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
18 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Well...don't quote Bruce Smith to me then regarding anything in the Cooper case. Forget about his foolishness, his lying, whatever else and consider this instead:

He's permanently alienated about every witness he's ever interviewed. I have zero respect for the guy. He even lied to everyone concerning the incident where Meyer Louie and I made a night trip fifty miles just to make sure he was okay. 

His very start with me regarding this case was a lie. He called me on the phone and claimed he was with a newspaper and wanted an interview. I gave him one. Didn't even know the guy. The only place it appeared was here at Dropzone, and he was let go from the paper long before he called me. This is Bruce stuff. He had a high point when he released his book. Everything else since has either been lies or plain shit. B)

Right, it is my fault for you not reading it.

I quoted it for context responding to a question from CooperNWO305.

My comments had nothing to do with Bruce's piece, he just summarized all the sketches and that was what CooperNWO305 was referring to.

It wasn't posted for YOU to distort and crap all over..

 

If he has something wrong in that piece point it out, otherwise you are discrediting yourself whether you have a legit beef or not.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flyjack, I’m trying to find the fbi 302 on the Lake Elsinore report. The one about the guy matching the cooper description, smoking Raleigh’s, wearing Cochran boots and asking questions about jumping out of Jet. I had it on my computer but it took a crap on me. I was hoping you could dig it up for me. 
 

Thanks, 

 

Nicky
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

Flyjack, I’m trying to find the fbi 302 on the Lake Elsinore report. The one about the guy matching the cooper description, smoking Raleigh’s, wearing Cochran boots and asking questions about jumping out of Jet. I had it on my computer but it took a crap on me. I was hoping you could dig it up for me. 
 

Thanks, 

 

Nicky
 

There are a bunch of pages starting at FBI p 5111 in FBI file part 17

https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper

 

Elsinore pops in an OCR search in ..

FBI Part 48, 40, 34, 33, 30, 20, 19 and 17

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

47 47